November 2nd, 2017

I had a doctor’s appointment the other day, and as I arrived I noticed a huge sign on the door announcing that I was entering a gun-free zone.

As I sat in my chair waiting, I pondered—not for the first time—what the purpose of such an announcement might be. Because to me it seems that it’s tantamount to a great big sign saying: “Defenseless sitting ducks here.”

I truly cannot imagine a scenario where such a sign would deter a would-be troublemaker or killer, and I can certainly imagine a situation where it would encourage such a person. Is there any would-be perpetrator planning to barge into a doctor’s office with a gun, eager to blast people away, who would see that sign and stop in his/her tracks and think, “Oops, I better go somewhere else to do some massacring. They don’t allow guns here!”?

Of course not. Au contraire.

In this case we’re talking about a gynecology office, by the way, so it’s a roomful of women. As I said, sitting ducks.

Another scenario that the sign makers may have had in mind is the person who carries a gun for defensive purposes, enters the office peacefully, but suddenly becomes enraged there. Maybe it’s a guy accompanying his wife and they suddenly have an argument in the waiting room. Maybe it’s a woman who doesn’t like being kept waiting (gynecology offices are notorious for waiting, although mine is very good that way). The idea is that gun owners—or people in general—are inherently unstable and might fly off the handle easily and then use those guns. But again, would such people ever be deterred by a mere sign? If they ordinarily carry, and left their weapons in the car, for example, all they have to do is go out there and get it and then re-enter the office.

However, there is one logical reason for having a gun-free zone, and that is to prevent the accidental discharge of a loaded weapon. But most of these incidents (called “NDs” for “negligent discharges,” or “ADs” for “accidental dischares,” depending on the circumstances) occur when a gun is being handled, often for cleaning. I doubt anyone is going to clean a gun while waiting to be called on in the gynecologist’s office by the nurse, however boring the wait might be.

Where do NDs take place? Here’s a rather large study, and it appears that they occur either in the home or at gun ranges or gun shows or gun stores:

Now there are many reasons why we saw that the home was the most common place for these discharges to take place. A LOT… and I mean FAR TOO MANY of these incidents happened when a child picked up an unsecured firearm that was not stored properly. There were also accidents while cleaning, or sometimes just playing around with the gun. But the overall motif behind each shooting is the same: It was simply due to a lack of care being taken at home and people letting their guard down.

I just spent quite a bit of time trying to ascertain how often, and under what circumstances, a concealed weapon that is not being handled goes off and injures someone. So far I don’t have the answer, and I’m going to give up for now (you’re free to keep looking, of course). I did encounter a great many articles that agree that a properly concealed weapon (properly holstered, for example) just about never goes off accidentally. But how many weapons are carried improperly, how many of them do go off, and if they do, is the only person ordinarily injured the gun owner?

I don’t have definitive answers to those questions, but if you look at articles such as this, for example, it seems fairly clear that a properly concealed weapon just about never go off accidentally, and the problem is encountered far more frequently when people take out concealed weapons and handle them improperly. But who takes out a weapon in a doctor’s office without meaning to use it? And would someone so negligent and reckless as to carry a firearm improperly (unholstered gun in a pants waistband, for example) really be obeying those “gun-free zone” signs, anyway?

By the way, quite a few firearms accidents that do take place in public areas that are not gun shows or firing ranges occur in public bathrooms and injure no one but the gun owner. Here’s the story of how it happens, in case you’re interested.

I haven’t found any incidents of the sort that advocates of gun-free zones seem to have in mind: where a concealed weapon is accidentally discharged in a public place such as a doctor’s office, for example, and injures others. Certainly I have never seen any that involve a properly carried (holstered, etc.) concealed weapon. That doesn’t mean such incidents never happen, but I just haven’t located any.

This entry was posted
on Thursday, November 2nd, 2017 at 2:57 pm and is filed under Law, Me, myself, and I, Violence.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.

47 Responses to “Gun-free zones”

Every few years you hear about somebody (usually a professional athlete) whose gun goes off at the disco or whatever. And yeah, these people probably just stuck the Glock in the pocket and therefore had it improperly holstered. Some guns can go off dropped on their back (where the hammer or striker is). More, I would say, accidentally go off when the idiot reaches into the pocket and squeezes the trigger trying to pull the gun or something. There is a reason for safeties, and a reason to carry unloaded.

A handgun does not fire unless the trigger is pulled. It is possible for older revolvers to fire if dropped, but all revolvers since the 1970s have a transfer safety bar that makes that impossible. But getting to the main point. No gun zones are potential death zones. Hoplophobia is a mental disorder.

Any time I enter a store with a no gun sign I immediately ask to speak to the manager. Then I ask the manager how do you know if I am or I am not carrying a gun, the answer is I don’t know. I respond the only way you could know is if you had a magnetometer at all entrances to your store. The response is always what is a magnetometer?

People who have no experience with firearms or gun safety should keep their mouths shut. Yes there are jackasses who mishandle guns and harm themselves or others. They are a tiny minority of the 100 million plus who are responsible gun owners.

Criminals by definition don’t obey laws, that is why they are criminals. Liberals tend to have thicker than normal skulls and followed a different evolutionary path than the rest of us. 😉

Apart from Waldmann’s probably accurate and sufficient explanation, one not-totally-bogus justification could be that the sight of a gun, perhaps concealed but accidentally revealed, would freak people out. Or, dare I say, trigger them.

There are people who will believe the sign. I’m thinking of older, perhaps “less worldly” people; people who see the sign as an assurance that they will be safe in that place. Fools, yes — but they are being induced to enter the premises under that false assurance. The owner of a public premises who puts up a sign saying that the premises is “gun free” should be liable in damages for the death or injury of anyone who is harmed or killed by a weapon on that premises. I think several states have passed laws to that effect.

You know, and I know, and Parker discovered that the owners of those “gun free” zones have taken no measures to ensure what the sign promises. We learned in Torts in Law One that you take your victims as you find them.

Not much logic to those signs but I would guess it is lawyers wanting protection from any firearm discharge on the premises. Accidental or otherwise. There are all sorts of laws in the various states about who gets to have a concealed carry license and where they can carry.

My specialist doc office here in Texas has the signs up in his building but my family doc does not. Of course the family doc has all sorts of gun and hunting magazines in his waiting room so there’s that too.

What I don’t get is what kind of legal protection are these signs anyway. If someone comes into a ‘gun free office’ or whatever and shoots somebody can that person sue the business for falsely claiming it was a ‘gun free zone’ when the business could just flip it onto the perp who was obviously breaking the law.

I mean what is the difference between two exactly the same shootings at two offices where one has a ‘gun free zone’ and the other has no sign?

Every living organism defends itself by various means. For humans that means tools. Rocks, sharpened sticks, bludgeons, etc. Firearms have been around for centuries. They have long been the weapon of choice. The weapon that makes it possible for an eighty year old woman to fend off a twenty year old thug.

Government has no power that I acknowledge to dictate what, when, where the tool I choose to use for self defense. Nor does government have the authority to make me or anyone else register/petition said government to allow me or anyone else for the natural right to possess a tool of self defense. Once you accept government has the power to decide if, how and where you may defend yourself, you are a serf powerless against the capricious rule of the elite. No thanks, I will never seek a permit to defend me and mine.

I’m not familiar with your state’s gun laws, so this is quite a bit of speculation.

In Michigan, our gun laws require businesses to place a readable notice in front of all of their entrances if they do not want firearms carried in their building. If there’s no notice, the carrier has implied consent to bring their firearm inside. Again in Michigan, though, it’s already illegal to carry a firearm in a hospital or clinic (unless you get permission from the management or owner.)

Another possibility is that the sign is mandated by state or local law.

None of this counters your argument, just trying to clarify why the sign might be there in the first place.

My health club has a “guns prohibited” sign also and it makes sense to me from the perspective that the guns might not be properly secured while people are changing, showering, swimming, playing basketball, etc. Same logic applies to a doctor’s office. It’s hard to conceal and secure a gun when all you’re wearing is a gown that’s open in the back.

RE: Virtue signaling
Yes, and as Neo correctly states it’s a naive notion and an invitation to violence. Because criminals do not respect such rules, gun-free zones announce that there are numerous easy targets to be had.

For years, gun-rights advocates have challenged their opponents to put “Gun-Free Zone” signs in front of their houses. Most people, of course, know that this is a stupid thing to do, but an organization started to do just that. They put up a web site with beautifully done graphics that homeowners could download for free, and they sold professionally printed yard signs at cheap prices.

This went on for a few months until the site was taken down and their 1-800 number played a recording advising callers to take down the signs. A journalist contacted the author of the web site and asked if something bad had happened. Apparently, it had, and the owners of the web site concluded that defining a gun-free zone might be an invitation to violence.

Homer says, “Duh!”

It is interesting that most people know, deep down, that declaring their own home to be a gun-free zone is a bad idea, and yet the push is on to declare many public spaces gun-free.

On a related note, ABC reported this morning that one of the issues they had with the NYC terrorist attack was that when it happened and the police engaged the terrorist , by-standers were frozen in place. They didn’t run. They didn’t hit the ground. They just stood there with a deer-in-the-headlights look. They simply couldn’t believe it was happening.

So how are your valuables secured at your ‘health club’? Do you need to keep your various ids, credit cards, checkbook, cash, cellphone safely locked in your car? Are you concerned that members of your ‘health club’ might be people who would enter the club and open fire? Are non-members allowed to enter the club and rummage through your possessions searching for a gun and start shooting people?

Kae Arby,

Unless there is a magnetometer at all entrances to any building, there is no way, except a full body (including body cavities) search to determine if someone is armed.

From my POV there is no assurance of ‘safety’ except in a totalitarian state in which there is no safety at all.

Parker…that has been my experience in 50+ years of firearms enjoyment. But I do remember a story or two cropping up where someone does something stupid in a public place…like a restaurant or disco as mentioned above…& someone takes a bullet in the backside or the foot.

But that is ALWAYS user error…I never buy the “I dropped it & it went off” excuse. Most often the safety is off, the round was already chambered, & the trigger got pulled in removing the weapon from purse/pants/pocket. There’s a whole video on the dangers of the “Mexican carry” method…and I don’t even want to think about that. Sheesh!

As my old Firearms Instructor used to say: There is no such thing as an Accidental Discharge. There is intentionally firing the weapon and there is a Negligent Discharge. Those are the two choices. If the discharge was “accidental” there was some form of negligence. Such is the state of firearms manufacture and design in this age.

One way NDs can happen, especially the kind that injure the wearer of the holster and firearm, is when a piece of clothing (shirt tail, drawstring, etc.) gets inside the trigger guard while the weapon is being holstered.

The person feels resistance and pushes harder on the weapon. BOOM. The clothing acted like a trigger finger.

As to Gun Free signs, I’m guessing that many are the result of Lawyers and silly regulations as much as virtue signalling.

I grew up often going hunting with my father and he had a handmade guncase in the house. I was very disappointed when he and my mother divorced and he didn’t leave me any of the weapons.

However, in my 20s, I remember thinking that owning a handgun wasn’t a good idea. I was unhappy with my life and wasn’t entirely sure I’d be entirely safe from myself.

While working in ER I saw the results of one unhappy incident when a 9 year old boy sought out his dad’s .38 up in a box in the closet and shot his 6 year old sister, not fatally but so badly the result was sure to unhappily affect both of their lives. This incident didn’t have any effect on how I felt about the right of a citizen to legally own and bear arms.

I also saw, naturally, all kinds of other patients with GSWs (gunshot wounds) as our ER was Portland Oregon’s trauma center and I worked nights.

I do remember finding it somewhat obnoxious when the boyfriend of a writer I knew (Katherine Dunn) showed up in her living room to watch pay-for-view boxing with an ostentatious gun there on his hip.

That’s almost everything I have to say about guns. If I relocate to the suburbs I may well want to own a weapon for home protection now that I’m less agile and strong. Also, when doing research I became fascinated by a particular gun I read about and would like to shoot.

Neo: what the purpose of such an announcement might be
Oh, it’s this new thing where everyone acts condescending under the idea of calming the cattle down (even if it’s nonsense). In this case, it’s so you’re not so afraid of your fellow other persons that you won’t want to come into the office. In a way this comes from a new woman based psychology industry which really has changed the way we look at the public in terms of making women (the traditionally sensitive that become more sensitive the more you cater this way), feel safe, and now young people, and the elderly. This is a more gynocentric nurturing thing that comes from advice from professionals, who you better listen to and do or else you may be blamed for ignoring the ladies. A feminist at work was appalled she couldn’t address a problem and I wouldn’t as there is no freaking way I would ever tell a woman at work she was wrong, no matter how many reams of dump I must prove it to a higher power that would in no freaking way tell her she is wrong or else the evil eye may turn their way.
The One Emotion That Really Hurts Your Brain
New research reveals the fearsome impact of humiliation.https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/fulfillment-any-age/201407/the-one-emotion-really-hurts-your-brain
Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990: Was originally passed as section 1702 of the Crime Control Act of 1990. Introduced in the Senate as S.3266 by Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-DE) on October 27, 1990
It’s what made it possible and constitutional for the legal creation of gun free zones in and within 1000 feet of schools.
But maybe, just maybe before ALL that you MIGHT remember who was making all the noise for a long time and fighting for such things, either in the name of children or in the name of saving women.
Risk Factors for Femicide in Abusive Relationships: Results From a Multisite Case Control Studyhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1447915/
The CDC had their nose in the tent too
The most traction to such things came from the women’s movement. Which is famous in some circles for some really wacky ideas they think change things. MomsRising?? The left found that for these special gender asymmetries in law, women could get things changed for being afraid, and they did. As they did they made more and more incursions into how to handle guns once there is a woman and relationship involved.
Don’t believe me? Don’t want to think that these signs are women’s logic? Well, what’s the logic behind a large number of people marching around with candles in response to a rape? Just like your obvious male logic application to the sign, it’s the same broken logic that would in courage things in the real world, but is to make who feel better? Safer? It’s about FEELING safer not BEING safer. But the broken logic is famous for its saying it does one thing or has one purpose, but has the opposite, and is quite puerile in its engineering. In court, what a woman wears has no bearing on outcome, but in the world and a concrete jungle you sure as heck know it does, everyone does, but we have lots of such verboten things from that side we are just verboten to get into. [how about fighting for high taxation when your also fighting to get the highest paying jobs which will pay those taxes… hmmmm]

Anita Sarkeesian has shown up for speaking engagements amidst terror threats before. But after learning that Utah State University was legally forbidden from restricting firearms at a Wednesday lecture over which she received a death threat, the nationally-known feminist writer and video game critic canceled her appearance.
She thinks those signs work!!!! Or not.The geek feminism wiki: Safe space
Safe space is a term for an area or forum where either a marginalised group are not supposed to face standard mainstream stereotypes and marginalisation, or in which a shared political or social viewpoint is required to participate in the space. For example, a feminist safe space would not allow free expression of anti-feminist viewpoints, and would typically also prevent concern trolling and…..
The larger point being that this has been brewing along with the unpacking knapsack stuff. The more the men were removed the more society is unbalanced towards catering to people who no matter how much they are catered to, will claim it sucks (or else the gravy train stops faster than its now doing).

Here, straight from the wiki..https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe-spaceIn the United States the concept originated in the women’s movement, where it “implies a certain license to speak and act freely, form collective strength, and generate strategies for resistance…a means rather than an end and not only a physical space but also a space created by the coming together of women searching for community.” The first safe spaces were gay bars and consciousness raising groups
From there it morphed over time to all these other safe space kinds of things!!
Consciousness raising (also called awareness raising) is a form of activism, popularized by United States feminists in the late 1960s. It often takes the form of a group of people attempting to focus the attention of a wider group of people on some cause or condition. However, in practice, raising awareness is often combined with other activities, such as fundraising, membership drives, or advocacy, in order to harness and/or sustain the motivation of new supporters, which may be at its highest just after they have learned and digested the new information.They admit it, claim it, own it and are proud of it!!!
Now tell me its not theirs…“Once you designate some spaces as safe, you imply that the rest are unsafe. It follows that they should be made safer.” – Judith Shulevitz
From signs of gun free zones, or no zones. To no men, no whites (which they have on campus as they are triggering). No triggering, and triggering warnings… and on and on.
When men were in charge, we didn’t have society cater to the rabbit and mice class who were always fearful, and no matter how many puzzles and save spaces and gun free zones and how inane it is as it only serves to coddle, they run this nut farm, but everyone denies they do!!!
Regardless of who said it: “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize”

This type of screening is consistent with the position of various medical associations, including the American Medical Association, which has called for gun violence to be treated like a public health issue. The group has likened the gun issue to safety discussions about swimming pools or lead paint. Gun rights groups say the approach is a way to restrict Second Amendment rights and have said doctors are not experts on gun safety.
-==-=-=—=-=-
In addition to lack of training or fear of offending patients, doctors hesitate to ask patients about gun ownership because they think it is against the law. The authors note in their article, however, that no federal or state law bars doctors from asking patients about gun ownership when it is relevant to their health or to the health of others. Laws also do not prevent doctors from sharing that information with police or family members when someone might be in danger.
-==-=-=—=-=-
some state and federal laws do address gun ownership questions. Doctors in Montana may not refuse health care for patients who will not answer questions about guns. In Missouri, doctors cannot record information about patient gun ownership unless a doctor believes the information is medically relevant.
-==-=-=—=-=-They also recommended doctors consider the demographics of patients in determining whether to ask about gun ownership. Most gun deaths are suicides, which occur primarily among white men.
[cause we are the ones on top who are oppressing everyone and so on]
-==-=-=—=-=-
the above was USNEWS… (except for my comment)

just note that certain classes are being pushed out just as they were pushed out of schools.
[anyone want to recite the stats? so the kind of people that need, want and learn to have this thing are under the tutalidge of???]

“Every living organism defends itself by various means. For humans that means tools.” parker

Not so… or at least not categorically. Besides fight there is flight. Lots of people, quite probably the majority in the West choose flight. Appeasement is a moral form of flight.

IMO, it is that which lies at the heart of the sentiment for “gun free zones”.

Cowardice comes in two flavors; physical cowardice and moral cowardice. The moral coward will first attempt to appease, then flee and when escape is no longer an option, collaborate. If faced with the sword, lots of Americans will convert to Islam.

BTW, in my state at least, such signs do not have the force of law. If one decides to carry a handgun into such a building, and management discovers this, the most they can do is ask him to leave. If he refuses, management can call the police and have him removed.

I know…some individuals who routinely ignore signs like that. If the neighborhood is sufficiently dangerous that a concealed carry is indicated, a business in that locale is equally dangerous. “Concealed” is, after all, concealed. If I were a bad guy, I would not assume that just because a business is advertised as “gun-free”, it really was.

Another good example of the two-faced protest was where one cheek showed #BringBackOurGirls, then after taking an especially virtuous turn, the other cheek showed #War!WhatIsItGoodFor… AbsolutelyNothing.

A public high school in Minnesota implemented a required, race-based English course aimed at eradicating “white privilege,” but it wasn’t billed that way to students or parents, according to a public policy organization.

The students wouldn’t know it was wrong, and the parents got a false message as to what it was

“Many of you [students] have made clear … that right now, you don’t feel physically safe,” the article read. “Know that we will do all that we can … to fight for you,” and that “we will teach rebellion against a broken world.”

From consciousness raising in a safe space, incrementally moving on wards till we discover triggers and need safe space, micro agressions and other things more safe space, race groups claiming needing segregated space to be safe – and now it leads to a constant state of fear that the lady teachers put into their kids to get them to think the way they want and comply with authority – and later wanting things to make them feel safe

like no guns signs…

its like the lyrics of a pink Floyd song writ large
[The thin ice]

a smothering mother like love that makes the kids that become adults scared and need reassurance that where they go is safe… Putting her fears into.. as the song goes

remember science? it used to be about hope, and the universe, and endless optimism… now everything gonna kill you, there is no escape, be afraid… asteroids, plagues, nuclear weapons, and on and on… they even had a show that was a round table of top scientists talking about how they think the world will end… really

fear of being with the wrong group
fear of having the wrong opinion
fear of being discovered
fear fear fear…

this fear has led to? how about a fear that had made men from male chauvanists to oppressors, to what now? And what will they do, afraid to be labeled?

The professor (Jessie Daniels) began her argument saying she learned that “the white-nuclear family is one of the most powerful forces supporting white supremacy,” adding that that families “reproducing white children” are “part of the problem” as they facilitate white supremacy in the country

Daniels notes that she’s not alone in her hostility towards the family. Other scholars have a “feminist critique of The Family as an inherently conservative force in society,” she says, citing the work of feminist scholars Peggy McIntosh and Michele Barrett, who argue in their book that the nuclear family structure is a “fact to be lamented.”

after thirty years of men being oafs and having to make it a bit worse and worse in all the media and on and on, the fear of being oppressed more, fear of being sexualized, fear of toxic masculinity like guns and the professional rapist in a rape culture..

this is what we havewho would DARE to tell them no?
given the lack of any counter and how surprisingly there are reams of this, what will it be like in 15 years? how afraid will the third generation be if this third generation is practically paranoid…

gun free zones, safe spaces, etc.
are not the kinds of things any society prior to this matriarchy ever had
but then again, i guess when the fit hits the shan the truth will win out

but fearful people will bow to the power that makes them feel safe
which has worked to great effect in the past bu authority based societies

In Texas you might get a class C misdemenor charge with a $200 fine unless it is a hospital which would go up to a class A charge and $4,000 possible. Of course that depends upon the correct sign, size and wording at the entrances.

Places that make over 50% of their revenue from selling alcohol are considered bars and guns are prohibited. A person with a concealed carry license who gets arrested for a felony DWI will also be in trouble if a firearm is being carried at the time. And to confuse things further, in Texas anyone who is not a felon, over 21 years old, can have a loaded pistol in their car, close at hand, without any kind of permit but don’t drink and drive.

In other words, in Texas, if your gonna go out drink’n and raising hell, “Don’t take your gun to town.”

If someone comes into a ‘gun free office’ or whatever and shoots somebody can that person sue the business for falsely claiming it was a ‘gun free zone’ when the business could just flip it onto the perp who was obviously breaking the law.

I would have to say that the injured party will be able to sue (successfully, I think) because they understood the sign to mean that the establishment will provide them adequate protection.

In Massachusetts — as in many other states — I don’t believe you would be arrested, or fined, for carrying a gun into a store (or doctor’s office) with a Gun-Free-Zone sign.

If you are carrying concealed, and this is discovered, they will probably yell at you. They may ask you to leave, in which case you should do so. (If you refuse to leave when they ask you to do so, you’re trespassing, and can be arrested for such.)

Of course, if you’re asked to leave, you are free to explain that you will leave quietly, and not come back, and advise others not to come either… because this establishment does not take your safety seriously.

(None of the above applies to schools or post offices, which are “gun free” — except for the criminals — by Federal law. If you carry a gun there, you can indeed be arrested.)

– – – – –

Neo, if you’re interested in the logistical issues — what DO you do with a concealed weapon in the ladies’ room, or when you’re disrobing for a doctor’s exam, and so forth — I highly recommend Kathy Jackson of http://www.corneredcat.com. She has a lot to say, and she says it quite well. (Among other things, she is credited with the expression “Why do I carry a gun? Because I can’t carry a policeman.”)

In it, Mrs. Jackson gives one of the best reasons I’ve ever heard for carrying a gun. Not because she’s afraid; not because she wants to feel ten feet tall; not because she’s expecting any kind of trouble. Rather, she wants to be prepared… and, when she’s in a situation that might otherwise be nervous-making, she can be calm, confident, and relaxed… because she knows she can defend herself if she must.

This allows her to be nice, and not defensive, in questionable circumstances — and, although I’ve never met her, I get the impression that she prefers to be nice.

A lttle over a year ago, here in St Cloud Minnesota, one of our (many) Somali “residents” went on a rampage in our main shopping mall, stabbing ten people, none fatally. Although there are signs at the entrances declaring the mall a gun-free zone, one man had disobeyed the sign and entered, carrying a concealed weapon. He shot the attacker dead. The local “news” was quick to point out that he was an off-duty police officer from another jurisdiction but that should not make any difference. Victims didn’t care if the hero who prevents the attacker from stabbing again is a cop or not.

We’re on our own out there in the world. That’s what freedom is all about.

I was just wondering about teen suicide statistics in states where a teen may have more difficulty obtaining a firearm:
accidental discharges vs. overdoses.

Also, looking at the elderly population, I can remember one elderly lady accidentally falling off the roof (six stories up) of her apartment building – as I said at the time. “Musta been adjusting the TV aerial” and another, this time an elderly gentleman “accidentally falling off an overpass into the rush-hour traffic on the roadway below; neither had ready access (in our state) to firearms.

My church has a gun with a circle and slash across it. No words. I consistently interpret that sign to mean that firearms are not for sale.

I’ll be getting my CC in a couple of months, and truly believe that a mere sign cannot take away my basic human right to self-defense. That said, the main reason I’m going to carry is for when I’m on hiking or biking trails. I can barely keep track of my cell phone, reading glasses and purse, so have little desire to carry constantly.

I assumed that Neo’s doctor visit experience was a version of Artfldgr’s 11/2/17, 7:40 post. Let’s turn the AMA and primary care physicians into an anti-gun police force. I take it that Neo’s doctor did not ask her to avoid firearms. But perhaps the GFZ sign was the next best, and less intrusive thing.

It looks like Neo has spent some time researching ND firearm mishaps. I’d like to see more of that if she finds something interesting.

I don’t carry but I have been looking at firearm safety closely and have the following opinions:

1) Handguns have a great deal of variability, more so than say driving an automobile. So know your firearm, but if you really care about handgun safety you should look carefully at many before choosing.

2) There are many great designs over the last century plus, but Glock revolutionized the industry in the late 20th. They decreed the manual thumb safety obsolete and declared themselves perfect and a large fan base agrees.

Like Miklos, I like the CZ-75B which has a thumb safety, and the original safety could be engaged in all cases. But the current model only allows the safety to be engaged in the hammer cocked, ready to fire condition. So if the hammer is down, the safety won’t work, and you can still have an ND with some kind of accidental double action trigger pull. That’s hard to do, but not impossible. Apparently, the user base demanded this. Arrgh!

3) Over the last several decades there have been some genuine instances of non-negligent malfunction discharges. In the early days of Glock, there was a large east coast police dept. where a number of their service weapons would discharge automatically when chambering a round. (Trigger touching not required.) Glock ended up shipping their entire supply of new handguns (which didn’t have the malfunction) to this PD, and still had a backlog of handguns to replace.

4) The US firearm industry has a methodology for drop testing handguns, and it is better than nothing, but not really rigorous. A major manufacturer with a best selling (millions) new model recently discovered that despite passing the tests, it would drop fire from 3 or 4 foot drops onto concrete. No recalls, but they offered a free trigger group replacement.

The DEA has a weird but tougher testing suite, and the most rigorous testing standard is probably the NATO standard.
_____

Maybe it’s just me but it seems like there is a lack of seriousness here.

Westerners have forgotten the martial art of how to teach 6 year olds how to maintain and use firearms without accidental discharges or homicide.

The old training methods of tradition still exist in some people, but not amongst “the West”.

That is because the cult of the gun has become a little bit too prominent and people think the gun=power. They don’t ever attach any value to the knowledge and experience related to the firearm.

The great thing about Target Focus Training is that it did not rely on firearms for lethal force. Whatever you can do with a gun, you can mostly replicate with bare arms or legs. You just have a range problem. But then, so do rifles vs handguns. Handguns have a range problem or limitation. All guns have a range limitation, it is not effective at zero distance. Tracking at target in front of you is very difficult compared to tracking at max range.

Here’s an example of one of those “accidental discharges”. (If you read on down, it’s of the usual sort — the guy pushed his gun into a pants pocket, and either his finger or something in his pocket pulled the trigger.)

When concealed carry was expanded in Minnesota, businesses were allowed to post a sign at entrances. The law specified the size of the sign, the typeface and the specific wording. If the business didn’t meet all of the specs, then the ban was invalid. As I recall, the penalty for violating a business ban was a petty misdemeanor the maximum fine was $25. Carrying without a permit is a gross misdemeanor with a $3000 fine.

Now is a good time to review Target Focus Training. That way you can become a non legal black belt, where your arms and legs are considered lethal weapons… it seems that is legally true, even though it sounded like a myth.

I suspect the “gun free” zones are a form of herd defense. The large herds of animals in Africa defend the herd from predators by feeding them the old, weak, sick, young animals, and the great majority of the herd is left to exist, until the predators are hungry again. The herd is so large, it can lose a few and still prosper. I remember Chairman O saying that the US can absorb more 911 type attacks. Yes, out of 300,000,000 people we can lose 3000 and still go on. But that is not the point.

On a practical point, people who are unarmed are relying on criminals obeying the law for their security. I will be my own first responder by taking an active role in my well being. I will also not patronize a business or activity that prohibit my self defense right, unless absolutly necessary, and I will let them know.

About Me

Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely leaving the fold and becoming that dread thing: a neocon. Read More >>